Can you provide an example of one? Even abstract mathematical theories have *some* assumptions (what a 'point' or a 'set' is, for example). I'm not aware of any theories that have *no* assumptions.

Quantum chromodynamics, for one. It derives only from observations. Many other physical-science theories are the same way. Of course, pure mathematicians don't have anything to "observe", so of course they must use assumptions, but even so, the fewer assumptions, the better (generally) as evidenced by the current battle between ZF and NF among set theorists.

Can you provide an example of one? Even abstract mathematical theories have *some* assumptions (what a 'point' or a 'set' is, for example). I'm not aware of any theories that have *no* assumptions.

Quantum chromodynamics, for one. It derives only from observations. Many other physical-science theories are the same way. Of course, pure mathematicians don't have anything to "observe", so of course they must use assumptions, but even so, the fewer assumptions, the better (generally) as evidenced by the current battle between ZF and NF among set theorists.

Sory, but you're wrong. The foundation of Mathematics is axioms -- a set of unprovable assumptions. Same wiht SCience. The Law of Conservation of Energy, and some of the others, cannot be proven, and are accepted only until they are disproven.

Sory, but you're wrong. The foundation of Mathematics is axioms -- a set of unprovable assumptions. Same wiht SCience. The Law of Conservation of Energy, and some of the others, cannot be proven, and are accepted only until they are disproven.

Math, yes, as I already recognized. Conservation of Matter/Energy, Momentum, charge, etc., and the laws of motion, and the laws of thermodynamics, and all other confirmed hypotheses are just that, confirmed. Science is based only on proven fact.

Quantum chromodynamics, for one. It derives only from observations. Many other physical-science theories are the same way. Of course, pure mathematicians don't have anything to "observe", so of course they must use assumptions, but even so, the fewer assumptions, the better (generally) as evidenced by the current battle between ZF and NF among set theorists.

Quantum Chromodynamics is built physics and mathematics, both of which have a number of assumptions. It also assumes that observations are accurate because they are repeatable, and that no 'free-standing' quarks exist because they have not been found. I understand that what you're saying here is that no *new* assumptions have been introduced to support this theory, but that's not the same as a theory that exists without assumptions.

If discussions of the morality of the Titan's actions is a tangent to the original discussion, this branch is a high-energy particle rocketing away at light-speed.

Kreistor wrote:

Not quite. You present persistent games as a constant series of small games that are won or lost. You have not distanced gaming from competition between players and solely as entertainment. To be pure entertainment, the Titans must have no influence on the World, and you are presenting that they do, in trying to suppress or destroy Parson.

Your theory requires that the Titans desire a *final* victory condition. You assume that, because it is game-like, that a final winner is desired. I'm trying to demonstrate that the Titans do NOT desire a final conclusion to their game, any more than football fans desire a single, final Super Bowl. If your assumptions are wrong, any conclusions that you draw from them are meaningless.

Kreistor wrote:

You did not face the PG-13 nature of Erfworld vs. your belief in the maliciousness of its creators. Did you think I missed that oversight? That failure suggests there is a big hole in your theory, and that it is in fact grossly inferior.

Erfworld has a PG-13 *language filter*, but allows for R/NC17-rated levels of sex and violence. The *comic* does not show the sex, but Maggie's discussion with Parson confirms that it is there. That implies a thought-censorship mentality on the part of the Titans, which is actually further evidence of malice in my opinion.

However, you clearly don't see the Titans in this way, and no amount of evidence or discussion will sway your opinions. Enjoy your pet theory, and rest firmly in the knowledge that nothing short a Word Of God declaration from Rob will be able to contradict your mental construct. Like believing in unicorns and crystal power, your theory is not actually doing any harm, so I'll leave you to it.

I'm trying to demonstrate that the Titans do NOT desire a final conclusion to their game, any more than football fans desire a single, final Super Bowl.

Clearly, an impossible task. There is no evidence, just opinion, on the motivation of the Titans.

Quote:

Erfworld has a PG-13 *language filter*, but allows for R/NC17-rated levels of sex and violence. The *comic* does not show the sex, but Maggie's discussion with Parson confirms that it is there. That implies a thought-censorship mentality on the part of the Titans, which is actually further evidence of malice in my opinion.

Antium, not bleeding despite massive damage. No intestines hanging out. More akin to a "skin" on an avatar, rather than actual injury.

As for sex, it happens in PG-13... behind closed doors.

"13+ Unsuitable for children under age 13. Children under 13 must be accompanied by an adult at all times. Stronger fantasy violence may be present, but if there is any blood it will be kept to a minimum. Explicit language is allowed but it cannot be used throughout.Mild sexual content is allowed, as is very mild sexual nudity but only if it is brief and implied. Strong horror moments are acceptable if it is deemed to be appropriate for young teenagers. Infrequent use of milder drugs is allowed."

Quote:

However, you clearly don't see the Titans in this way, and no amount of evidence or discussion will sway your opinions.

You don't have "evidence". You have interpretation and opinion.

Quote:

Enjoy your pet theory, and rest firmly in the knowledge that nothing short a Word Of God declaration from Rob will be able to contradict your mental construct.

In the form of actual evidence from the comic, instead of interpretation and opinion from other readers, sure it can. But that was stated in the original post.

Quote:

Like believing in unicorns and crystal power, your theory is not actually doing any harm, so I'll leave you to it.

It might have been fun, if you weren't 100% guilty of everything you accuse me of. There's a word for that somewhere... starts with an "h". Hippopotamus? Nah, not quite right...

A non-Royal Side could win the game, because it will not create its own competition, but the Royal Sides ensure none becomes large nough to threaten victory. Sides that can't win ensure Sides that could win will not win.

Fix'd already. GK is getting ganged up on and it doesn't matter. No one is ganging up on Charlie.

Yet.Or, that we currently know of. Could have happened in the past.

What we do know is that Charlie has a base no one can find, that he strives to keep hidden, possibly at great cost, and most likely has a fear of being discovered.

Consider this: As soon as someone knows where Charlie is located then he is toast. See previous posts about this being a game where it is very difficult to defend ground.. all an enemy has to do is get to your capital and you are potentially toast. Charlie will have figured this out very quickly, along with that his most powerful units can't adequately protect his capital / base.

So, yes, I agree "no one is ganging up on Charlie" .. but only because they can't find him. How long will Charlie last if his position was known?

No, it isn't an assumption. That theory forms from extending the game world motif. Basically:1) Erfworld bears many characteristics of a world created as a game. Assume it is a game.2) Games must have players or it isn't a game.3) The only known entities that could play the game are the TitansTherefore: 4) The Titans are playing a game.5) People play games to win.Therefore: 6) The Titans are competing against each other to win the game.

2 is shaky, and 5 and 6 are not absolute. People often create game-like systems in order to explore experimental hypotheses. In other words, sometimes people play games in order to find out who would win.

I think that the assumption that the Titans are the primary originators is flawed. The reason I think this is that they look like mile-high Elvis impersonators. That's something that seems to be skipped in all this theorizing: that Erfworld is blatantly derivative of, well, Earth. It contains references and in-jokes that none of the inhabitants are ever going to understand, because they have no experience or knowledge of what those references and in-jokes are based on. But those references and in-jokes do exist, and it seems unlikely that the Titans put them there because the Titans are one themselves.

MarbitChow, for every assumption you accuse me of, you make a corresponding assumption yourself. Try again.

Kreistor wrote:

It might have been fun, if you weren't 100% guilty of everything you accuse me of. There's a word for that somewhere... starts with an "h". Hippopotamus? Nah, not quite right...

(Ok, by calling me a hypocrite, you managed to goad me into at least one more post. Congratulations!)

You're not *guilty* of "making assumptions". There's nothing wrong with that - every theory requires assumptions. You and I both have assumptions.

I have issues with your fundamental assumptions, however, and because of that I doubt your conclusion.You conclude that the Titans *want* Parson to win the game, so that they can reset the game and play again:

Kreistor wrote:

The Titans created a game that could not be won. In order to reset the board, it must be won, so an external force needed to be brought in to win the game.

Kreistor wrote:

Except for one thing I suppose. Will Parson realize the board will be wiped out after he wins, before he "wins"?

Even if every one of your assumptions were correct - that they didn't realize they created a game that couldn't be won, and that they realize it now, and that they want to win so that they could start over - your conclusion makes no sense. They created Erfworld. It is easier to destroy than to create. Nothing is stopping them from wiping the board clean and starting over. If you play-test a game, and realize it's broken, you can stop, change the rules, and start again.If the Titans are letting Erfworld continue, it's either because they are powerless to stop it, or it is because this is the version of Erfworld that they WANT.

Your conclusion requires that the Titans are both omnipotent (they create the whole world) and powerless (they can't change it once they create it), geniuses (they see that, summoning a single person from another dimension, they can set in motion a string of incredibly complex events that will transform the entire game) and idiots (they didn't realize that, based on a few design criteria, their game could not be won), benevolent (creating sentient life that wants to be there) and callous (they manipulate those same people into causing the end of their world, just so that they can play again). You can certainly attempt to rationalize these contradictions (and I have no doubt that you will try), but to do so, you'll be creating explanations out of thin air, because we have no other real information about the Titans.

In addition, your theory diminishes the efforts that Janice, Marie, and others have made. Instead of these characters striving nobly against war, and finding a loophole in their world structure that they might use to save themselves and everything that they love from endless conflict, they're still just pawns of the Titans, dancing on the strings of these omnipotent beings. That, more than any other reason, forces me to reject your theory, solely because I'd rather enjoy a story where mankind (well, Erf-kind) overcomes their horrible fate through their own striving rather than it being handed to them by divinity.

You're not *guilty* of "making assumptions". There's nothing wrong with that - every theory requires assumptions. You and I both have assumptions.

No, you used "assumption" as an attack word. You attacked only my assumptions as if those could be defended. I stated that they couldn't at the start. You continue to see only the trees when I state that there's a forest in front of you.

Quote:

I have issues with your fundamental assumptions, however, and because of that I doubt your conclusion.

Good for you. Dealt with in Post 1. I'm looking for FACTUAL evidence against my theories, not opinion and alternative interpretations.

Quote:

Even if every one of your assumptions were correct - that they didn't realize they created a game that couldn't be won, and that they realize it now, and that they want to win so that they could start over - your conclusion makes no sense.

Well... unless you're just not smart enough to understand it. That's another plausible explanation of why you can't make sense of it.

Quote:

They created Erfworld. It is easier to destroy than to create. Nothing is stopping them from wiping the board clean and starting over. If you play-test a game, and realize it's broken, you can stop, change the rules, and start again.

Dealt with in Post 1. In order to prevent cheating, they locked the world so none of the Titans could influence it (ie. cheat), except according to the Rules of the Game. They can't change it, so they can't destroy it.

Quote:

Your conclusion requires that the Titans are both omnipotent (they create the whole world)

Omnipotence implies power over all things in all universes. I called them demigods, somewhere between god and man, because they don't need infinite power, just enough power to create Erfworld, which may be nothing more than a single world, and not universe.

Quote:

and powerless (they can't change it once they create it)

Stated above, and in Post 1, they chose to lock the world down to prevent cheating. They are powerless over Erfworld because they chose to be in order to keep the game fair..

Quote:

geniuses (they see that, summoning a single person from another dimension, they can set in motion a string of incredibly complex events that will transform the entire game)

Genius relative to us, sure. But since I, a normal human, developed the very plan you note, you're either saying that I'm a genous for coming up with it, or you're grossly overestimating the level of intelligence needed to come up with it. Of course, I prefer the former conclusion on that one.

Quote:

and idiots (they didn't realize that, based on a few design criteria, their game could not be won),

Arrogance, not idiocy.

Quote:

benevolent (creating sentient life that wants to be there)

In a way, yes. Only some benevolence, because the world they did create has a lot of violence.

Quote:

and callous (they manipulate those same people into causing the end of their world, just so that they can play again).

And create a new world with new people.

Quote:

You can certainly attempt to rationalize these contradictions (and I have no doubt that you will try), but to do so, you'll be creating explanations out of thin air, because we have no other real information about the Titans.

No, I just say, "You do realize that normal humans are masses of contradictions? You're accusing me of that now. You believe creatures like this exist, so why is it so hard to believe the Titans are just more powerful versions of us?"

Quote:

In addition, your theory diminishes the efforts that Janice, Marie, and others have made. Instead of these characters striving nobly against war, and finding a loophole in their world structure that they might use to save themselves and everything that they love from endless conflict, they're still just pawns of the Titans, dancing on the strings of these omnipotent beings.

Yes, Marie dances to no one's tune... except her prophecies. I wonder where she gets her Predictions from? I'm sure she just makes them up as she goes along, and isn't accessing the magic that the Titans created to answer the questions she asks Predictions for. Nope, absolutely no vector for the Titans to directly influence Marie, and thereby Wanda, Jack, and Janis, at all.

Hey, did you notice that a Predictamancer ensured that Wanda would be popped? No, no vector for the Titans to influence the world at all.

Quote:

That, more than any other reason, forces me to reject your theory

I think you grossly overestimate how much I respect your opinions. It was never the purpose of this thread to convince others that have their own theories, and I clearly stated that in Post 1, when I said I wouldn't defend my baseline assumptions. The only thing I wanted was hard facts that cut apart the details of the theory, and you have totally failed to find a single one.

It was never the purpose of this thread to convince others that have their own theories, and I clearly stated that in Post 1, when I said I wouldn't defend my baseline assumptions. The only thing I wanted was hard facts that cut apart the details of the theory, and you have totally failed to find a single one.

Wow - you want hard facts on the Titans, who are only shown on the very first page of the comic, and who's very existence you had to actually explicitly state as an assumption that was not subject to debate, then create a whole bunch of additional assumptions, and only demand that they be contradicted by non-existent facts?

Posting into a forum implies a desire for discussion. Why didn't you just save yourself the trouble and not post anything at all?

Not zero. Just not particularly impressed by your expectation that other people have to care. You quit this thread once, which gives the opponent last word. When you do that, you must expect to suck up whatever he posts. You weren't prepared to do that. How many threads around here have I announced final message and not been sucked back into? Answer: all of them. I always drop it for good, no matter what the opponent says.

Quote:

Wow - you want hard facts on the Titans, who are only shown on the very first page of the comic, and who's very existence you had to actually explicitly state as an assumption that was not subject to debate, then create a whole bunch of additional assumptions, and only demand that they be contradicted by non-existent facts?

Or on the nature of Predictamancy, the specifics of the Summoning Spell, the actions Parson has performed... you're the one that can't get past the Titans, not me. The assumption about the Titans being gamers is only the start. I develop a lot based on other facts out of that. You can fight the belief that the game can't be won, by demonstrating how some of those points I made a re wrong. LOTS of facts that can be discussed.

When you do that, you must expect to suck up whatever he posts. You weren't prepared to do that. How many threads around here have I announced final message and not been sucked back into? Answer: all of them. I always drop it for good, no matter what the opponent says.

Good for you! That makes you a better "anonymous internet arguer" than I am, I guess.

Kreistor wrote:

You can fight the belief that the game can't be won, by demonstrating how some of those points I made a re wrong. LOTS of facts that can be discussed.

Why would I fight that? That's the only thing that you got right: the game as it was originally designed cannot be won.

Kreistor wrote:

Or on the nature of Predictamancy,

Which we have no actual knowledge of.

Kreistor wrote:

the specifics of the Summoning Spell,

Which we have no knowledge of the mechanics of.

Kreistor wrote:

the actions Parson has performed...

Which make up the majority of the story, and are adequately explained by the fact that he was summoned by a bunch of pacifists.

Kreistor wrote:

you're the one that can't get past the Titans, not me.

No, you posited that "Parson sees the deeper truth that some force wanted him in Erfworld, not just a bunch of pacifists. There's a missing piece to the puzzle."You then present the Titans as that force, and come up with a completely imagined justification as to WHY they would want him.

You completely invented this "deeper piece", required that people accept the Titans as de facto creators of Erfworld in truth rather than just in allegory, then imagined a bunch of reasons for their actions.

The reason I fixated on the motives of the Titans is because you MADE THAT A REQUIREMENT FOR THE DISCUSSION:

Kreistor wrote:

If you don't think they exist because my explanation is inadequate for you, or if you think they abandoned Erfworld long ago for whatever reason, then "Buh-bye, have a nice day, don't bother replying," because it is not up for debate.

I didn't bother attempting to discuss any aspect of your idea that you indicated were not open for discussion, and tried to stay within the bounds of that which you stated were open for debate.

If you didn't want the theory challenged, why did you bother posting it at all?

When you do that, you must expect to suck up whatever he posts. You weren't prepared to do that. How many threads around here have I announced final message and not been sucked back into? Answer: all of them. I always drop it for good, no matter what the opponent says.

Good for you! That makes you a better "anonymous internet arguer" than I am, I guess.

Clearly.

Quote:

Kreistor wrote:

You can fight the belief that the game can't be won, by demonstrating how some of those points I made a re wrong. LOTS of facts that can be discussed.

Why would I fight that? That's the only thing that you got right: the game as it was originally designed cannot be won.

Cool. Then if the only other issue is whether my assumption is correct, and tehre is absolutely no evidence that it isn't, then you're done, right? No, you're still obsessed.

Oh, BTW, I'm not obsessed because THIS IS MY THREAD. Of course I'm going to defend it forever. This really does never end until you just give up.

Quote:

Kreistor wrote:

Or on the nature of Predictamancy,

Which we have no actual knowledge of.

We've got lots of examples from which concepts and rules can be derived. I've already done that in older threads. The nature of Predictamancy ois one thing I'm pretty versed on, primarily because I have had to include prophecy in my own RPG games.

Quote:

Kreistor wrote:

the specifics of the Summoning Spell,

Which we have no knowledge of the mechanics of.

Linked product of a couple classes (not going to look them up), cast by a single Caster, but should have been a Lookamancer, etc, etc. Yeah, we know stuff.

Quote:

Kreistor wrote:

the actions Parson has performed...

Which make up the majority of the story, and are adequately explained by the fact that he was summoned by a bunch of pacifists.

Not sure which version of pacifist you're using here. The Thinkamancers fit one version, but not the definition I think you're using.

Quote:

Kreistor wrote:

you're the one that can't get past the Titans, not me.

No, you posited that "Parson sees the deeper truth that some force wanted him in Erfworld, not just a bunch of pacifists. There's a missing piece to the puzzle."You then present the Titans as that force, and come up with a completely imagined justification as to WHY they would want him.

Actually, it's called "profiling". Examining the choices someone makes in order to try to determine motivation. You were doing that when you try to associate the malicious nature of the world to give the Titan's a motive to see others suffer, so I really don't know why you're so angry. You've been doing the same all thread. There's that H word again, rearing its ugly head.

Quote:

You completely invented this "deeper piece", required that people accept the Titans as de facto creators of Erfworld in truth rather than just in allegory, then imagined a bunch of reasons for their actions.

As stated at the start, Page 1 is written as narration from a third party, not as a history by a character, and therefore is not allegory but fact. You need to prove that it is allegory.

Quote:

The reason I fixated on the motives of the Titans is because you MADE THAT A REQUIREMENT FOR THE DISCUSSION:

Which part of "Not up for discussion" did you miss? How many times do I have to say it. What are you possibly gaining by ragging on something I am not going to even acknowledge as a debatable point?

Quote:

Kreistor wrote:

If you don't think they exist because my explanation is inadequate for you, or if you think they abandoned Erfworld long ago for whatever reason, then "Buh-bye, have a nice day, don't bother replying," because it is not up for debate.

I didn't bother attempting to discuss any aspect of your idea that you indicated were not open for discussion, and tried to stay within the bounds of that which you stated were open for debate.

No, look at what I said here. I said I wasn't going to debate Titan motivation. That is ALL you have been ragging on for two pages.

Quote:

If you didn't want the theory challenged, why did you bother posting it at all?

Cool. Then if the only other issue is whether my assumption is correct, and tehre is absolutely no evidence that it isn't, then you're done, right? No, you're still obsessed.

Wow - that's how debate works? You make an assumption, and if it can't be disproved it's right? Sweet, so I can assume you're a robot masquerading as a human, since you can't prove me wrong.

Kreistor wrote:

Oh, BTW, I'm not obsessed because THIS IS MY THREAD. Of course I'm going to defend it forever. This really does never end until you just give up.

I'm cool with it going on forever, actually. You and I are the only ones reading it by this point, and I can easily set up a script to just post variations of "You're wrong" once a day for the rest of my life.

Kreistor wrote:

We've got lots of examples from which concepts and rules can be derived. I've already done that in older threads. The nature of Predictamancy is one thing I'm pretty versed on, primarily because I have had to include prophecy in my own RPG games.

So, you predicted that Thinkamancy worked by G-Strings long before Rob wrote about it, then? Nah, didn't think so. You don't know how anything in Erfworld actually works on a fundamental level until Rob actually spells it out. Neither do I, obviously. You can make a lot of noise about how you think it works, but running an RPG doesn't make you an authority on a theoretical type of magic that doesn't exist anywhere outside of Rob's head.

Kreistor wrote:

Linked product of a couple classes (not going to look them up), cast by a single Caster, but should have been a Lookamancer, etc, etc. Yeah, we know stuff.

There's a difference between knowing that "things fall if you drop them" and knowing how to calculate the velocity and acceleration of a falling object. We're in the "things fall down" category - we don't have any real knowledge about how summoning works, other than what casters were involved.

Kreistor wrote:

Not sure which version of pacifist you're using here. The Thinkamancers fit one version, but not the definition I think you're using.

I'm not convinced you're thinking at all, you chat-bot. I'm quoting you directly, as I pointed out in the next lines:

Kreistor, in the very first post, wrote:

Parson sees the deeper truth that some force wanted him in Erfworld, not just a bunch of pacifists. There's a missing piece to the puzzle.

I changed the above to the 'quote-tagged' format so it's easier for you to spot. I'm sorry you were confused by the use of quotation marks to denote that I was quoting you.

Kreistor wrote:

Actually, it's called "profiling". Examining the choices someone makes in order to try to determine motivation. You were doing that when you try to associate the malicious nature of the world to give the Titan's a motive to see others suffer, so I really don't know why you're so angry. You've been doing the same all thread. There's that H word again, rearing its ugly head.

Bold is for emphasis, not anger. Nothing you can say will actually get me angry, especially now that I've assumed you're a chat-bot. Also, why the reluctance to say hypocrite? Does a reference to that word cause an exception in your programming?

Kreistor wrote:

No, look at what I said here. I said I wasn't going to debate Titan motivation. That is ALL you have been ragging on for two pages.

Actually, you said you weren't going to debate Titan EXISTENCE. You then went on to hypothesize about motivation. Your theory is nothing but ramblings about their potential motivation, and the conclusions that can be drawn from it. But - here's the kicker - we know nothing about the Titans. You aren't profiling, you're projecting. And here's evidence:

Kreistor wrote:

It's perfectly arrogant. When someone of great intelligence and ego creates something, he does so with the self-confidence necessary to believe that if he is infallible, anything he creates is infallible. And when it isn't, there's nothing that can be done to fix it.

You have perfectly predicted your reactions to challenges to your theory in this thread. You created a theory. You're intelligent, and clearly have an ego. And you will allow nothing to try to 'fix' your theory.

Kreistor wrote:

The theory is up for debate. The original assumption is not.

The theory is nothing but assumptions, because we have no facts about the Titans whatsoever. If the assumptions cannot be challenged, then of course the theory is unassailable.

You go from assumption to conclusion based on that assumption, then add another assumption and a conclusion based on that assumption, and this is how you construct your entire 'theory'.

The only facts that you include are proof that "Erfworld the Game" cannot be won, which might have been remarkable if Janice didn't beat that fact over our heads at the end of Book 1 already.

<Ahem> Parson is in Erfworld so Rob can tell his story, sell some books, make a living, and entertain us royally. And, of course, doubtless derive much amusement watching the forum denizens hopping about like coked-up kangaroo rats in a bingo cage.

_________________The Truth Will Set You Free. But First It Will Piss You Off.

You go from assumption to conclusion based on that assumption, then add another assumption and a conclusion based on that assumption, and this is how you construct your entire 'theory'.

Yes... that's the scientific method, if you don't recognize it. Make an assumption (such as "All observers measure the speed of light at the same speed", you then develop the math, derive equations (like E=mc*c), and test the derivations against real world cases (such as "GPS satellites require correction every day for general relativity, or it drifts by 30 metres per day"), and then you know your assumption was reasonable.

Yes... that's the scientific method, if you don't recognize it. Make an assumption (such as "All observers measure the speed of light at the same speed", you then develop the math, derive equations (like E=mc*c), and test the derivations against real world cases (such as "GPS satellites require correction every day for general relativity, or it drifts by 30 metres per day"), and then you know your assumption was reasonable.

The scientific method requires that others are allowed to challenge your assumptions, and requires that you are able to validate your assumptions.

Putting your fingers in your ears and shouting "you can't challenge my assumptions because I say you can't" is a 'scientific method' that is only used by intelligent design proponents.

The scientific method requires that others are allowed to challenge your assumptions, and requires that you are able to validate your assumptions.

Putting your fingers in your ears and shouting "you can't challenge my assumptions because I say you can't" is a 'scientific method' that is only used by intelligent design proponents.

No, you don't get to challenge the assumptions, because scientists generally don't reveal what they are working on until after the experiment is done and his theory proven. You have to challenge and disprove the experiments before you can question the assumption that inspired them with vehemence. Challenging the assumption when the experiment is clearly reproducible gets you nothing but derision. You can challenge the assumption by developing a new assumption that incorporates the experiment. If that's how you view it, then I already stated in POST 1 that alternate theories that incorporate all the known evidence exist and cannot be disproven. So, again, I don't understand your fixation on me. Because you're not attacking my ideas anymore, you're attacking me for preferring my own assumption over yours.

My point is that assumptions are inherent in the system. You're beating on them like you don't wake up every morning set on a time that assumes your car will start. Assumptions are not heinous, and they are not flaws. We live every moment of every day making one assumption or another. Or those that convince themselves of that tired old "assumptions make and ass out of you and I" ignore the assumptions they are constantly making. You're inside a building, assuming you can escape it if it starts collapsing. Assuming that the chemical they add to natural gas to let you smell it is in there so your room doesn't explode if it is leaking. Assuming a thousand tiny details that let us live without paranoia. Making assumptions is the only way we can remain mentally healthy.

Your assumptions are not "supported by experimentation". I'm not even going to bother arguing the flaws in thinking that you have to disprove the experiment before you challenge the assumptions.

* Assumption: The Titans created the magic system.

The flaw: The magic system was able to pull Parson from (our) Earth. The Titans did not create Earth. Either they are able to influence other universes, placing them on par with the creator of our universe (if any), or magic is an aspect of the multiverse. The Titan's influence is only known to extend to the creation of Erfworld.

* Assumption: The Titans are playing a game to win.

The flaw: If Erfworld were a game, the Titans would be able to directly control the sides that they are playing. Overlords / Rulers are making the decisions, not the Titans, so it is more accurate to describe Erfworld as a simulation (which is a game without victory conditions, typically). Simulations are normally designed to run forever without one element 'winning', and the design of Erfworld's system, as you pointed out, seems to bear that out.

Your theory rests on invalid assumptions, and the conclusion of your theory creates a scenario that negates and renders hopeless all the efforts for peace that the Erfworld inhabitants are making, if the Titans are just going to reset the board. Contrary to what you might believe, I'm not attacking you personally, but theory you originally presented, and have refused to modify in light of the issues I raise, is flawed on both a logical and an aesthetic level.

Who is online

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum